Marital Foreplay and Sex - Page 14

Jessup · #**196** Jun 9, '12, 5:18 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by jilly4ski

Why does it matter what is being consented to as long as there is consent? And why do you get to define perverted and what isn't? The Church has (semi) clear guidelines on what "perverts" the marital act. And if we are really honest about it, would not the Church have better standing to determine what is and is not perverted (ie moral) and a random individual?

I highly doubt you could show me how Church teachings (doctrine/dogma) has changed in 2000 years (because it hasn't) since you cannot even articulate the current expression of the teaching and seem generally misinformed on this issue, (missionary position and only on fertile days really?).

The missionary position on fertile days was sarcastic mockary; tha's why I mentioned the 4rth Wednesday of every month.

jilly4ski · #**197** Jun 9, '12, 6:10 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jessup

The missionary position on fertile days was sarcastic mockary; tha's why I mentioned the 4rth Wednesday of every month.

Which is against forum rules. Please see here before you post.

jilly4ski · #**198** Jun 9, '12, 6:14 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jessup

What about the 23 or so different rites of the catholic church that isn't under the same Pope but all have claim to holy orders? that is 23 reasons the church hasn't been consistent. Which rite is the right one? I don't want to get off topic, from the OP so I'm going to leave it at that. I can start another thread to discuss that somewhere else.

??? There are 23 different rites but they are all under the Pope, so I don't know what your point is. Are you trying to talk about the Orthodox? Should we lump all protestants in there too and then claim that the Church has changed? But that is really not relevant since we are talking about morality and the constant teaching of marriage and sexual relations in the Church, not about different acceptable modes of worship.

TrueLight · #**199** Jun 9, '12, 6:16 pm

Sorry to interrupt the two of you, but I'm going to ask again.

Quote:

Is sex discussed this openly in Pre-Cana? Where does one learn this kind of thing in detail?

Also, are most orthodox priests consistent when it comes to what is allowed and what is not allowed?

shipwrkd · #**200** Jun 9, '12, 8:01 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by TrueLight

Sorry to interrupt the two of you, but I'm going to ask again.

Quote:

Is sex discussed this openly in Pre-Cana? Where does one learn this kind of thing in detail?
Also, are most orthodox priests consistent when it comes to what is allowed and what is not allowed?

I think you'll find the answers to many questions regarding sex and the Church in Christopher West's book: Good news about sex and Marriage and Greg Popcaks book: Holy Sex. Both books try to explain John Paul II's teachings on Theology of the Body in layman's terms. They are entertaining and informative and carry the Imprimatur which I understand to be a declaration that they are free from moral or doctrinal error. You'd be very surprised at how nonrestrictive the Church is as long as the sex ends with tab A in slot B. As was stated by several before, almost anything goes.

TrueLight · #**201** Jun 9, '12, 8:36 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by shipwrkd

I think you'll find the answers to many questions regarding sex and the Church in Christopher West's book: Good news about sex and Marriage and Greg Popcaks book: Holy Sex. Both books try to explain John Paul II's teachings on Theology of the Body in layman's terms. They are entertaining and informative and carry the Imprimatur which I understand to be a declaration that they are free from moral or doctrinal error. You'd be very surprised at how nonrestrictive the Church is as long as the sex ends with tab A in slot B. As was stated by several before, almost anything goes.

Thanks.

And as long as foreplay doesn't last for days?

Gordon Sims · #**202** Jun 9, '12, 10:30 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by TrueLight

Is sex discussed this openly in Pre-Cana? Where does one learn this kind of thing in detail?

Also, are most orthodox priests consistent when it comes to what is allowed and what is not allowed?

It seems to me that there is room for some subjective decisions here.

I'm not sure how it is now, but when my wife & I got married it really wasn't discussed at all. Sure, they mentioned that the marital act was intended to be just between a man & wife and was one of the benefits of marriage, but that was it. The priest who married us touched on it a bit, although he certainly didn't give us anything close to orthodox advice. He told us that once we were married, we were free to do whatever we chose in the bedroom. He also told us that artificial contraception was okay, and a good idea for a young couple who didn't want to get pregnant right away. I was never given valid answers to what the Church really teaches about sex until I first read these forums a few years ago.

kelvinf · #**203** Jun 10, '12, 11:28 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by shipwrkd

I think you'll find the answers to many questions regarding sex and the Church in Christopher West's book: Good news about sex and Marriage and Greg Popcaks book: Holy Sex. Both books try to explain John Paul II's teachings on Theology of the Body in layman's terms. They are entertaining and informative and carry the Imprimatur which I understand to be a declaration that they are free from moral or doctrinal error. You'd be very surprised at how nonrestrictive the Church is as long as the sex ends with tab A in slot B. As was stated by several before, almost anything goes.

Wow! The way you presented your post reflects how problematic those two books could be.

Christopher West only presents his own interpretation of Bl. JPII's work and not the Church's interpretation. The Pope was holding a general audience--open to lay people--and I believe it's a challenge for those of us who were not there to directly read what he said, rather than relying on someone else's interpretation--which is not in anyway the interpretation of the Church.

Again, West and Popcak do not represent or speak for the Roman Catholic Church. So saying that the Church is nonrestrictive as long as sex ends with tab A in slot B is misleading.

And for your information, I am very, very sure that, the book, Holy Sex by Popcak carries no imprimatur on it! I have a copy at home. When I go back home, I will double check. I have read just a dozen of pages of Holy Sex and I find too many problems with this book. I will never recommend such a book to anyone.

For 2000 years, we have had many saints, great theologians and Mother Church. They have always respected the secrecy of the marital act. If some individuals (who I wouldn't even call theologians) today think otherwise, then that's simply their opinion and not Church teaching. The things about oral sex, anal sex, vibrators, dressing like porn stars cannot be found in the Theology of the Body or any official Church document. Otherwise, I would like to have a reference to such a document.

So all in all, your post is misleading.

shipwrkd · #**204** Jun 10, '12, 1:30 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by kelvinf

.Christopher West only presents his own interpretation of Bl. JPII's work and not the Church's interpretation. The Pope was holding a general audience--open to lay people--and I believe it's a challenge for those of us who were not there to directly read what he said, rather than relying on someone else's interpretation--which is not in anyway the interpretation of the Church.

Then please recommend a book that presents the Church's view. I've tried to read TOB and it was written by a VERY scholarly man and is quite vague, as it probably has to be.Again,

Quote:

West and Popcak do not represent or speak for the Roman Catholic Church. So saying that the Church is nonrestrictive as long as sex ends with tab A in slot B is misleading

This was an over simplification on my part, I'll take the slap on the knuckles.

Quote:

And for your information, I am very, very sure that, the book, Holy Sex by Popcak carries no imprimatur on it! I have a copy at home. When I go back home, I will double check. I have read just a dozen of pages of Holy Sex and I find too many problems with this book. I will never recommend such a book to anyone.

Your right about the imprimatur on Holy Sex, but many priests HAVE recommended it, including mine.

Quote:

For 2000 years, we have had many saints, great theologians and Mother Church. They have always respected the secrecy of the marital act. If some individuals (who I wouldn't even call theologians) today think otherwise, then that's simply their opinion and not Church teaching. The things about oral sex, anal sex, vibrators, dressing like porn stars cannot be found in the Theology of the Body or any official Church document. Otherwise, I would like to have a reference to such a document.

We'd probably like to have reference the other way, can you show me such a document?

TrueLight · #**205** Jun 10, '12, 1:35 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gordon Sims

I'm not sure how it is now, but when my wife & I got married it really wasn't discussed at all. Sure, they mentioned that the marital act was intended to be just between a man & wife and was one of the benefits of marriage, but that was it. The priest who married us touched on it a bit, although he certainly didn't give us anything close to orthodox advice. He told us that once we were married, we were free to do whatever we chose in the bedroom. He also told us that artificial contraception was okay, and a good idea for a young couple who didn't want to get pregnant right away. I was never given valid answers to what the Church really teaches about sex until I first read these forums a few years ago.

Wow!

shipwrkd · #**206** Jun 10, '12, 2:08 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by TrueLight

Wow!

There's a lot of GOOD stuff in the forum but there's also some misconceptions posted...probably some by me. If you don't believe me, join one on the Church and gun control. There are good Catholics who believe every gun should be destroyed and there are good Catholics who will give up their gun when it's pried from their cold, dead hand. Both positions are OK as is any position in between.(please, no comments on gun control, it was only an example) Take everything you can from here...but before you start living it, make sure it's right.

BTW, artificial contraception is NOT OK, it's one of the gravest sins we could commit. And that's not my opinion, it's fact.

Jessup · #**207** Jun 10, '12, 4:50 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by jilly4ski

??? There are 23 different rites but they are all under the Pope, so I don't know what your point is. Are you trying to talk about the Orthodox? Should we lump all protestants in there too and then claim that the Church has changed? But that is really not relevant since we are talking about morality and the constant teaching of marriage and sexual relations in the Church, not about different acceptable modes of worship.

start another post we'll discuss it there. but I don't want to get off the OP topic here

Tiziana · #**208** Jun 11, '12, 2:30 am

This is delightful.

kelvinf · #**209** Jul 1, '12, 4:50 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by shipwrkd

Then please recommend a book that presents the Church's view. I've tried to read TOB and it was written by a VERY scholarly man and is quite vague, as it probably has to be.Again,

The Bible and the Catechism of the Catholic are the books that represent the Church's view.

Quote:

Your right about the imprimatur on Holy Sex, but many priests HAVE recommended it, including mine.

I was waiting to have a discussion with a theologian (a retired Professor of Theology at our university) and it finally happened. I heard that he explained complex Church teachings in a way that young people would easily grasp and appreciate. He--Prof. of Theology, who taught Theology students (and priests!?)--believes in pluralism, as he frequently used pluralism to contradict moral relativism whenever I brought it up. He is sometimes very critical of the Church and the Pope and says that's the job of theologians.

Here on CAF, posters have said questionable things coming from priests. E.g. the use of contraception.

Holy Sex (the back cover and the very first pages) is flooded with positive remarks from a lot of priests even though the book seems to advocate questionable and unnatural acts within Catholic marriage.

One of the saints said that she had difficulties with the spiritual journey because she did not have a good confessor. Sins that were mortal were considered venial by her confessors....she said. (I will check again and cite the source later.)

And I will conclude on this by quoting St Thérèse of Lisieux:

The second thing I learnt had to do with Priests. Up to this time I had not understood the chief aim of the Carmelite Reform. To pray for sinners delighted me; to pray for Priests, whose souls seemed pure as crystal, that indeed astonished me. But in Italy I realised my vocation, and even so long a journey was a small price to pay for such valuable knowledge. During that month I met with many holy Priests, and yet I saw that even though the sublime dignity of Priesthood raises them higher than the Angels, they are still but weak and imperfect men. And so if holy Priests, whom Our Lord in the Gospel calls the salt of the earth, have need of our prayers, what must we think of the lukewarm? Has not Our Lord said: "If the salt lose its savour wherewith shall it be salted?"[6] Oh, dear Mother, how beautiful is our vocation! We Carmelites are called to preserve "the salt of the earth." We offer our prayers and sacrifices for the apostles of the Lord; we ourselves ought to be their apostles, while they, by word and example, are preaching the Gospel to our brethren. Have we not a glorious mission to fulfill? But I must say no more, for I feel that on this subject my pen would run on for ever.

(Bold mine)

Quote:

We'd probably like to have reference the other way, can you show me such a document?

The Bible and the Catechism condemn immoral unnatural acts that by their very nature cannot lead to the creation of new life. But today, everything is relative.

**JharekCarnelian** · #**210** Jul 1, '12, 4:57 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jessup

What about the 23 or so different rites of the catholic church that isn't under the same Pope but all have claim to holy orders? that is 23 reasons the church hasn't been consistent. Which rite is the right one? I don't want to get off topic, from the OP so I'm going to leave it at that. I can start another thread to discuss that somewhere else.

If you are talking about the Eastern Catholics firstly you are confusing rites and Churches and secondly all the particular Churches are in communion with the Pope and they do not simply claim to have Holy Orders, they do have these. No rite is the 'right one', all are of equal dignity. That is like asking which parent you should love more.